Detroit At Phoenix - Nov 10, 2005

I have to admit, the Pistons showed something last night. They can really turn it on when they want to. But I am wondering if that lock downdefenseis a thing of the past. Even when we outscored them so well in the fourth, they still got a lot of points. We outscored them, not held them down.

Click to expand...

I disagree about the lock-down D part of your post (agree with the rest). Pistons showed some of their best lock down D last night in the last 1/2 of the 4Q. In the quarter overall, they outscored Phoenix 37-22, and had a 20-6 run in the last 6 minutes. It doesn't get any better than that. (22 points a quarter is 88 points a game, pretty good against the Suns).

I guess that some people would like to see us play that way the whole game ("the right way"), but I think that if we had tried, they'd have worn us out, and put a hurting on us in the last few minutes. (If I remember last year's game at Phoenix, I believe that we had a 10-pt lead in the 4Q and lost-could be wrong).

I'd like to do a statistical analysis of points given up in the 4Q (maybe only in games that were close after 3Q) last year when we played D on every posession, versus this year, where we've toned it down and focused on O for the first three quarters. Bet we have better D down the stretch this year.

I don't think she was trying to say that Flip is Phil reincarnated, just that they both teach great offensive systems effectively that when coupled with the right personnel have potential to lead to many championships.

I disagree about the lock-down D part of your post (agree with the rest). Pistons showed some of their best lock down D last night in the last 1/2 of the 4Q. In the quarter overall, they outscored Phoenix 37-22, and had a 20-6 run in the last 6 minutes. It doesn't get any better than that. (22 points a quarter is 88 points a game, pretty good against the Suns).

I guess that some people would like to see us play that way the whole game ("the right way"), but I think that if we had tried, they'd have worn us out, and put a hurting on us in the last few minutes. (If I remember last year's game at Phoenix, I believe that we had a 10-pt lead in the 4Q and lost-could be wrong).

I'd like to do a statistical analysis of points given up in the 4Q (maybe only in games that were close after 3Q) last year when we played D on every posession, versus this year, where we've toned it down and focused on O for the first three quarters. Bet we have better D down the stretch this year.

Click to expand...

Although this opinion of not playing all out defense for 4 quarters appears to be growing popularity, I couldn't disagree more. I think these are conditioned athletes that should run hard and play agressive defense the entire game. If they are unable to keep up the intensity then they need to be subbed out for someone who can. The Stones' should never intentionally keep the "D" down a notch. If we can grow a lead early we do nothing but insure more minutes from our bench. Although close games are entertaining to watch, I want us to continue to try to knock the other team out in the first round if we have a shot. I'm all for change of pace to disrupt the "O" but intentionally playing moderate defense for the purpose of conserving energy to me is ludacris.

We never can put lock down D on PHX for any extended period of time. I believe most of it is because they play a different kind of style then anyone else in the league. For example on the fast break instead of their wings going torward the basket they float to the three point line. It is easy to work on in a series, but not for one game in the middle of other games. However, I am a little concerned by the lack of blocked shots lately.

One thing I am glad 2 see is Billups dishing out the ball so well. Also, if we are going to continue to roll, Sheed needs to put up 16-20 a game. Instead of those 6-8 point games.

Also in response of the poster who said they were surprised that Darko did not play any, you most consider who we were playing. Its hard to keep a 7 footer on the floor against PHX unless he is very athletic. I am a HUGE Darko fan but this would be a bad game for him to get some burn. However, Portland is perfect.

Although this opinion of not playing all out defense for 4 quarters appears to be growing popularity, I couldn't disagree more. I think these are conditioned athletes that should run hard and play agressive defense the entire game. If they are unable to keep up the intensity then they need to be subbed out for someone who can. The Stones' should never intentionally keep the "D" down a notch. If we can grow a lead early we do nothing but insure more minutes from our bench. Although close games are entertaining to watch, I want us to continue to try to knock the other team out in the first round if we have a shot. I'm all for change of pace to disrupt the "O" but intentionally playing moderate defense for the purpose of conserving energy to me is ludacris.

Click to expand...

I do disagree. I think that we've got the most well-conditioned atheletes in the league, but trying to maintain the all-out D paradigm is a good deal of the reason that we lost last year's title. Guys were just too tired (especially Prince) to finish the season strong. I realize that in theory the bench should have been better developed last year to handle the work-load, but the painful fact is that we just didn't have a lot of really good defensive subs, and if they could play solid D, they brought very little to the O end. Opening it up for three quarters in fact makes it a lot easier to get the Delfino's, Arroyos, etc. into the games (who can hang with other teams on O, and should be able to keep the games close), and keeps the starters fresh to dominate in the fourth. Also, I think that the notion that we can't build big leads without playing smothering D is not correct. 70% of the teams in the league we will kill just based on offensive talent. No need to play 88-80 games against Charlotte and Atlanta. Doesn't serve a purpose.

I think that this All-D all-the-time strategy is also bad for the long-term prospects of the team. In addition to players careers being lengthened by keeping them fresh, more top-quality FAs will want to sign on with Detroit if it is less a grind to play here. It really is a tough thing to find the guys to fit into the system. Some flexibility in the system will only help long-term.

I really fell for this idea watching the Spurs last year. They played some awesome O for most of the game, then were able to crush teams in the final moments, with no apparent downside.

The proof, I think is in the players faces. Instead of the grimmacing cold stares of serial killers they had in years past, they look like they're really having fun. I'm having fun too.

I do disagree. I think that we've got the most well-conditioned atheletes in the league, but trying to maintain the all-out D paradigm is a good deal of the reason that we lost last year's title. Guys were just too tired (especially Prince) to finish the season strong. I realize that in theory the bench should have been better developed last year to handle the work-load, but the painful fact is that we just didn't have a lot of really good defensive subs, and if they could play solid D, they brought very little to the O end. Opening it up for three quarters in fact makes it a lot easier to get the Delfino's, Arroyos, etc. into the games (who can hang with other teams on O, and should be able to keep the games close), and keeps the starters fresh to dominate in the fourth. Also, I think that the notion that we can't build big leads without playing smothering D is not correct. 70% of the teams in the league we will kill just based on offensive talent. No need to play 88-80 games against Charlotte and Atlanta. Doesn't serve a purpose.

I think that this All-D all-the-time strategy is also bad for the long-term prospects of the team. In addition to players careers being lengthened by keeping them fresh, more top-quality FAs will want to sign on with Detroit if it is less a grind to play here. It really is a tough thing to find the guys to fit into the system. Some flexibility in the system will only help long-term.

I really fell for this idea watching the Spurs last year. They played some awesome O for most of the game, then were able to crush teams in the final moments, with no apparent downside.

The proof, I think is in the players faces. Instead of the grimmacing cold stares of serial killers they had in years past, they look like they're really having fun. I'm having fun too.

Click to expand...

But the Spurs actually held opponents down to less points than the Pistons did last year.

2004-2005 season

Spurs PF - 96.2 PA - 88.4 Stones PF - 93.3 PA - 89.5

So what is this reserved "D" that you are talking about. Seems to me that they made the conscious effort to shut down teams for the entire 48 as well. Statistically, they actually did a better job than we did. The difference was that when San Antonio wanted/needed to score it didnt look as painful as it did for the Pistons. The Spurs actually beat the Suns playing fast break basketball....but coupled with their staggering defense.

Besides, when the Pistons won the championship with their bench two years ago they played in all out full court press defense all the way to a championship. The starters were not playing the gluttony of minutes they did in 2004. Now, I see your arguement if the intent this season is to remain with a shortened rotation, but we are not going to be doing that this year. Flip likes to use his bench and our bench happens to have alot of promise. Because of this we have the luxury once more to try to keep up the intensity for the entire game. Ron Harper spoke about the difference between a champion and a dynasty. He said that dynasty teams show intensity all the time. They are relentless. We need to have that same passion and trust in our bench to keep the intensity up when the starters are getting rest.

I have to admit, the Pistons showed something last night. They can really turn it on when they want to. But I am wondering if that lock down defense is a thing of the past. Even when we outscored them so well in the fourth, they still got a lot of points. We outscored them, not held them down.

I was sure that Delfino had two threes but neither one of them was a three. That is really a surprise because the announcers and I all saw threes.

They really had their way in driving to the basket at will. Seemed to me that that was Darko's talent, shutting the lane down, and he should have come in ahead of Evans. If they did not use him then, I don't know when they will. If he is to be used with the rookies, I hope they start playing Dale. Same as last year, our three bigs played the whole game with Ben in there 44 minutes. And same as last year, we strolled out to try to bother the three-point shooters with our arms down. Lucky they stopped hitting them with such regularity.

But as usual, our guards came through to bail us out in the clutch.

Click to expand...

The reason the suns scored so much is becuse we didn't take care of the ball, especially in the first 3 quarters and it wasn't because the pistons had bad defense. our defense stepped up when we didn't turn the ball over. I'm almost 100% sure i'm right on this.

I'm sorry we must have seen another game. Please explain how he did this? He only hit one wide open outside shot. That was pretty much it for his contribution. I consider myself a pretty objective guy. I give credit where credit is due. Arroyo had a bad game last night. He was a liability on defense BIG time. 1 for 6 from the field. Blown layup after blown layup. His lack of speed on defense was exposed last night. The only thing I can say is that he didn't turn over the ball so he didn't give the game away...at least based on ball-handling. He did not do a good job of setting up for scores either. The Pistons shot 54% last night and he was not responsible for one assist. I haven't soured on Arroyo for the entire season, but this was definitely not a case of him bringing the Pistons back from a deficit. Arroyo was in the game during a run, but his contribution was minimal at best.

The story of this game was the Piston's bigs switching off their man on defense in the 4th quarter instead of having the guards fight screens unsuccessfully all night. Oh, and I think Evans contributed more than you are giving him credit for. The Pistons were outrebounded most of the game until they rallied in the 4th...the only person who seemed to be successfully getting long rebounds off missed threes was Evans. He finished with 5 boards..but they were all extremely important boards against a fiesty Phoenix defense at the time. Although, he had some defensive lapses against Barbosa (Barbosa appeared to be two steps quicker than Evans), he was still the difference between this game getting out of control for us on many occasions. Hustle boards were imperative during many stretches of this game. So YOU can chill on the "negatives" buddy.

Click to expand...

A point guard does not have to score a point or get an assist to be doing his job. His job is to control the game. Forget individual plays. Did we turn the ball over a lot? Were we getting good shots? Was the other team getting a lot of fast break points? Did the ball get up the court quickly and did we get into our offensive sets in time for the offense to be effective. The answers were all positive in regards to Arroyo. My negative comments about Evans were from his first half play, not the 2nd half.

I can't catch everything the first time I watch a game,which is why I generally watch each game twice. But while I missed mentioning Evans getting those rebounds, you are forgetting to give credit for Arroyo for being a solid guy bringing the ball up and setting the plays up. Contribution minimal? Who else was going to do his job? Did you expect Billups to play the entire game? Doing a solid job as the point is a big contribution, whether you believe it or not. Just see what happens to teams who don't have a 2nd capable point to come in for their starter. Pretty ugly in many cases. I will leave it up to the next guy to mention as many cases as they wish. Should not take a lot of thought.

But the Spurs actually held opponents down to less points than the Pistons did last year.

2004-2005 season

Spurs PF - 96.2 PA - 88.4 Stones PF - 93.3 PA - 89.5

So what is this reserved "D" that you are talking about. Seems to me that they made the conscious effort to shut down teams for the entire 48 as well. Statistically, they actually did a better job than we did. The difference was that when San Antonio wanted/needed to score it didnt look as painful as it did for the Pistons. The Spurs actually beat the Suns playing fast break basketball....but coupled with their staggering defense.

Click to expand...

During regulation periods of the 3 games the Spurs had with the Suns last year, San Antonio averaged 109 points to the Suns 104 (pretty amazingly close to Detroits 111-104 game last night). The Suns scored an average of 24 points (96 ppg average) per 4th quarter of those games, meaning that they averaged 27 points per quarter the rest of the game (108 ppg average). I don't know if this holds for the rest of the Spurs efforts, but against the Suns, it suggests that they coasted on D until the 4rth quarter, then turned on the D.

Since I post both here and at detnews.com a lot, I can see where someone might think I don't like Evans. Just not true. I point out his shortcomings, but I love his steady shot. His rebounding is ok for his position of small forward, and more than ok if he is subbing for Rip. His defense is not great but yet good and improving as he gains NBA experience. He is really just barely past being a rookie. His ball handling skills have a long way to go, but he should be able eventually to turn his scoring ability into assists as the other team tries to stop him from scoring. He can drive in, or create space for his jumper for which he elevates really well. Sometimes, he does not take his time around the basket. A lot of this is simply inexperience. They let him go in Sacramento for this inexperience, which was just plain unwise on their part and great luck for us.

A point guard does not have to score a point or get an assist to be doing his job. His job is to control the game. Forget individual plays. Did we turn the ball over a lot? Were we getting good shots? Was the other team getting a lot of fast break points? Did the ball get up the court quickly and did we get into our offensive sets in time for the offense to be effective. The answers were all positive in regards to Arroyo. My negative comments about Evans were from his first half play, not the 2nd half.

Click to expand...

Arroyo's statline for 14 mins:

Mins - 14 FGM-A 1-6 FTM-A 1-2 PF - 2 PTS - 3

So, you want me to give Arroyo credit for going 14 mins against one of the worst defensive teams in the league and not getting a turnover. If you count all of those bricks he was throwing up that caused a loss of possession I would say that he did have a negative impact.

So basically although Carlos comes into the fourth quarter with the Pistons down 8 and leaves with them down 5, my take of this is that he had more of a negative impact in the game than a positive one. This is not to say that Carlos is not capeable of better, but he really sucked this game. He will not get any props from me for not being able to keep an offensive player in front of him for 17 minutes or blowing lay up after layup or being unable to help convert easy scores against the weakest defense in the league. Chauncey walked away with 11 assists, Carlos couldn't manage 1? That's a dropoff if I've ever seen one.

During regulation periods of the 3 games the Spurs had with the Suns last year, San Antonio averaged 109 points to the Suns 104 (pretty amazingly close to Detroits 111-104 game last night). The Suns scored an average of 24 points (96 ppg average) per 4th quarter of those games, meaning that they averaged 27 points per quarter the rest of the game (108 ppg average). I don't know if this holds for the rest of the Spurs efforts, but against the Suns, it suggests that they coasted on D until the 4rth quarter, then turned on the D.

Click to expand...

or.....it took them until the 4th quarter to solve their offensive wizardy.

I guess that some people would like to see us play that way the whole game ("the right way"), but I think that if we had tried, they'd have worn us out, and put a hurting on us in the last few minutes. (If I remember last year's game at Phoenix, I believe that we had a 10-pt lead in the 4Q and lost-could be wrong).

Click to expand...

Last season under the "Right Way" we lost 97-100 in Phoenix. I also seem to recall a lead given up in the 4th quarter. The way PHX was nailing jumpers last night I believe we would have lost that game under LB. Just my opinion. Would not have scored enough points.

How can you defend a team that is hitting long 2's and 3's like they were for the better part of 3 quarters?

Lee, you called it right on Evans. I don't believe you have a bias there. But you are way too easy on Arroyo. That is a position that may be pivotal to our championship (should be going for a three-peat).

So, you want me to give Arroyo credit for going 14 mins against one of the worst defensive teams in the league and not getting a turnover. If you count all of those bricks he was throwing up that caused a loss of possession I would say that he did have a negative impact.

So basically although Carlos comes into the fourth quarter with the Pistons down 8 and leaves with them down 5, my take of this is that he had more of a negative impact in the game than a positive one. This is not to say that Carlos is not capeable of better, but he really sucked this game. He will not get any props from me for not being able to keep an offensive player in front of him for 17 minutes or blowing lay up after layup or being unable to help convert easy scores against the weakest defense in the league. Chauncey walked away with 11 assists, Carlos couldn't manage 1? That's a dropoff if I've ever seen one.

Click to expand...

Carlos Arroyo came in the game in the 3rd quarter with us down 11 points. But for a missed free throw or two, we would have tied the game up pretty much at one point. Your editing is pretty poor. Just because Arroyo got stuck guarding a player a lot taller than him does not make that his man to guard. Just the way things went at the moment.

The last play before Carlos Arroyo came out, Barbosa scored. But think about this. With a couple more free throws made, and Arroyo coming out a moment earlier, CB could have come back in with the score tied, even though he left the game with us down 11. Make fun all you want, but it won't change the fact those were 4th quarter minutes against a very good team. And Arroyo did just fine. PS, I just enjoyed that game again a couple of hours ago.

Carlos Arroyo came in the game in the 3rd quarter with us down 11 points. But for a missed free throw or two, we would have tied the game up pretty much at one point. Your editing is pretty poor. Just because Arroyo got stuck guarding a player a lot taller than him does not make that his man to guard. Just the way things went at the moment.

Click to expand...

Can't let it die, huh?

"Editing is pretty poor" (chuckle). Perhaps, but not as poor as any commentary that calls this a good game by Arroyo. Did you ever think for a second that the offense was going at Arroyo because he had shown that he was by far the weakest defender in the game? Or take into account that Nash rested during this run so Arroyo was going up against Phoenix's heralded bench (sarcasm). Funny how you can overanalyze lineups but can't see the obvious.

You are right, he did come in with them down 11 points..but I guess I was giving him a break seeing that although the 4th quarter started with them making up a basket, he did virtually nothing to help them get to that point. In fact, add 3 more misses to the commentary...mostly layups. Arroyo was a liability that game. The only thing Arroyo did not do was trip over his shoe while bringing the ball up court. Lord knows that under Phoenix's pressure defense bringing up the ball was a challenge. (whateva!) Being able to bring the ball up against Phoenix in my opinion does not validate ones contribution to our team. Arroyo was NOT the player making most of the decisions on offense during that run. You want to credit him for the reason why we made up 6 points and I am basically saying that he is the reason why Nash got more rest and we didn't evaporate that lead.

Dude, if this is how you evaluate talent...you are probably still wearing a "Save Rodney White" t-shirt.

Lee356 said:

The last play before Carlos Arroyo came out, Barbosa scored. But think about this. With a couple more free throws made, and Arroyo coming out a moment earlier, CB could have come back in with the score tied, even though he left the game with us down 11. Make fun all you want, but it won't change the fact those were 4th quarter minutes against a very good team. And Arroyo did just fine. PS, I just enjoyed that game again a couple of hours ago.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I see it differently than you. I'm just glad Arroyo's supporting cast carried him during that time. I'm not buying your "just because he was on the court that means he was productive" philosopy. I've noticed that you haven't provided any real details on how his positives outweighed the negatives for him in this game. All, I here is...well, he was out there.

Anyway, I look forward to Arroyo rebounding from this performance, but I have my eye on Mr. Arroyo. He needs to get with the program...or see if he can get you to represent him when he has to deal with Pistons management.

Its not just one game. Arroyo so far is slightly net plus despite all the bench players being net minus so far. (Look at 82games.com.) Per this, its him carrying the rest of the bench, not the other way around. But hey, its early. You can call the fact that we keep winning with Arroyo on the floor a fluke. For a while at least. So keep your delusions for the moment. They will be proven as delusions sure enough soon enough.

Its not just one game. Arroyo so far is slightly net plus despite all the bench players being net minus so far. (Look at 82games.com.) Per this, its him carrying the rest of the bench, not the other way around. But hey, its early. You can call the fact that we keep winning with Arroyo on the floor a fluke. For a while at least. So keep your delusions for the moment. They will be proven as delusions sure enough soon enough.

Click to expand...

Again, I said he had a BAD game. lol! Not that he wouldn't contribute during the season. Funny, the lengths people will take to defend a point when they obviously have none. Nothing you have said has convinced me that he had a good game. You've only proven that it takes little to impress you unless you have an obvious bias against a player. What's next? Carlos is a quick defender because he has short hair. lol.